100% agree. I can't even stand to listen to him. Not interesting at all, tries way too hard.I don't get the allure with Minihane.
100% agree. I can't even stand to listen to him. Not interesting at all, tries way too hard.I don't get the allure with Minihane.
Phenom said:So, Minihane is now a host! THE SAVIOR IS HERE!
How big of a swing will this produce in the ratings? Are D&C back to number 1?
Sarcasm aside, I can't see one person making the switch from T&R to D&C now. Maybe Minihane will bust Dennis' chops a little bit. But really, does anybody think this will have an impact on the ratings? Who in the world is tuning in to hear Kirk Minihane?
This is a band-aid. The shoe hasn't dropped with D&C yet.
I would never switch full time but it might cause me to listen more often. I love T&R but there are times when Fred and Wallach are insufferable or they keep harping on something they find funny (drunken recaps) that I have no interest in. At those times I might go to D&C if they are talking sports, but if I hear anything else or Mike Adams I immediately switch to my Ipod.Phenom said:So, Minihane is now a host! THE SAVIOR IS HERE!
How big of a swing will this produce in the ratings? Are D&C back to number 1?
Sarcasm aside, I can't see one person making the switch from T&R to D&C now. Maybe Minihane will bust Dennis' chops a little bit. But really, does anybody think this will have an impact on the ratings? Who in the world is tuning in to hear Kirk Minihane?
This is a band-aid. The shoe hasn't dropped with D&C yet.
I think they're mocking Finn's article that described Minihane as being an "equal voice" on the show.HomeBrew1901 said:Turned this on because I was watching the Bruins last night, holy shit is this awkward. I think they are openly mocking Minihane with equal time but can't tell if they are just joking.
OK. That makes a lot more sense. Still awkward but if Minihane keeps challenging Callahan they will be a quick number 2 option.Red(s)HawksFan said:I think they're mocking Finn's article that described Minihane as being an "equal voice" on the show.
HomeBrew1901 said:OK. That makes a lot more sense. Still awkward but if Minihane keeps challenging Callahan they will be a quick number 2 option.
MyDaughterLovesTomGordon said:I think it's only fair to expect D&C to have a rhythm in talking to one another that's going to be hard for them to break. I was listening for about 20 mins this morning and they have a way of going back and forth with each other that leaves Minihane having to interrupt all the time, but that might go away with time.
For all of Dennis' many faults, he is a professional host and he's generally pretty decent at keeping the conversation moving fluidly (this is something Holley is really struggling with as first host on the Big Show, by the way. Holley is a second man, not a host, in my opinion, so Salk better be good). If he can be open to actually involving Minihane, I actually think D&C&M could be pretty good, with Dennis handling the mechanics of coming in and out of breaks and handling the welcomes and goodbyes of the guests and Minihane and Callahan actually both being fairly thoughtful and funny.
I disagree. It might take a few weeks or months, but I can see people over 40-45 switching back if this experiment works. I love T&R but sometimes their antics get old and if someone is looking for serious sports talk they aren't going to stick with T&R, especially during big events, trades, etc...Phenom said:I've listened for most of the 9:00 hour ... Minihane has talked maybe two or three times.
Dennis and Callahan have been together for 15 years. It's going to be hard for a third man to helicopter in and be an equal voice on the show.
Like I said, I can't imagine anybody will switch from Toucher and Rich to D&C because of this switch. The spring ratings book will come in, D&C will still be tied with NPR, and then real changes will start to happen. This isn't a real change.
MyDaughterLovesTomGordon said:I think it's only fair to expect D&C to have a rhythm in talking to one another that's going to be hard for them to break. I was listening for about 20 mins this morning and they have a way of going back and forth with each other that leaves Minihane having to interrupt all the time, but that might go away with time.
For all of Dennis' many faults, he is a professional host and he's generally pretty decent at keeping the conversation moving fluidly (this is something Holley is really struggling with as first host on the Big Show, by the way. Holley is a second man, not a host, in my opinion, so Salk better be good). If he can be open to actually involving Minihane, I actually think D&C&M could be pretty good, with Dennis handling the mechanics of coming in and out of breaks and handling the welcomes and goodbyes of the guests and Minihane and Callahan actually both being fairly thoughtful and funny.
What they still lack most is creativity. There needs to be more variety than just talk-guest-talk, though I'm not sure what I'm looking for there.
Then again, I'm in Maine and don't have the T&R alternative to really judge by. Our local morning show is a struggle.
Chad Finn said:They mock the most when they're scared and know I'm right. Watching the simulcast is pretty interesting. One host goes well beyond the other in engaging Minihane. He's the one who will still be on the show in six months.
I think they're some of the most knowledgable, in terms of the national scene, of all the hosts in New England. They know college football like crazy, and are very solid on the NFL. Plus Javier is the only full-timer around who actually played pro hockey. He does color for the Pirates and is pretty good, talking intelligently about player skills and in-game strategy. Sedenka is a decent play by play guy for the red claws and is getting better and knows the celts organization well.CantKeepmedown said:
Ooof, you got that right. I'm not a fan of D&C at all, but the other option here is beyond brutal. Not to get too far off topic, but what are your thoughts on the afternoon guys?
wutang112878 said:I am rooting for D&C's failure, so I am glad they are letting them talk about it, but EEI has to be considered incompetent to let this go on. This debate isnt going to help them win the ratings battle, and just makes Gerry look like more of an awful human being. Just keep doing the same thing over and over and I am sure those ratings will turn around!
Phenom said:Haven' heard the show the past few days ... but please tell me Gerry isn't condoning how difficult he thinks it would be for a gay football player in the NFL. That would be the last straw as far as I'm concerned.
Not trying to defend Gerry but yesterday I turned into Felgar and Mazz and it seemed like Felgar was making sort of the same argument saying he would not draft Te'o due to the distractions he would cost. He said it would be too much of a headache especially for the Pats. Maybe I am misunderstanding his (Felgar's) argument, but what is the different between what he said and what Gerry said. They both said that Te'o would drop in the draft. I did not hear what Callahan said and am trying to reconstruct Callahan's argument based on the thread. Sorry for any misconceptions and please fill me in on the differencessoxfan121 said:Have you ever seen a large dog, like a Rotty or GS, straining on a leash to get after something it wants to go after?
Callahan is the large dog; a gay football player is a T-bone with peanut butter and bacon smeared all over it.
Its either that or Callahan is a moth and the gay football player is a bug zapper.
It's coming, literally.
richgedman'sghost said:Not trying to defend Gerry but yesterday I turned into Felgar and Mazz and it seemed like Felgar was making sort of the same argument saying he would not draft Te'o due to the distractions he would cost. He said it would be too much of a headache especially for the Pats. Maybe I am misunderstanding his (Felgar's) argument, but what is the different between what he said and what Gerry said. They both said that Te'o would drop in the draft. I did not hear what Callahan said and am trying to reconstruct Callahan's argument based on the thread. Sorry for any misconceptions and please fill me in on the differences
Felger said something similar today with Wiggy. Not that he wouldn't draft Te'o but that he could see coaches and GMs passing on him because they don't want to deal with the distraction it would cause.richgedman'sghost said:Not trying to defend Gerry but yesterday I turned into Felgar and Mazz and it seemed like Felgar was making sort of the same argument saying he would not draft Te'o due to the distractions he would cost. He said it would be too much of a headache especially for the Pats. Maybe I am misunderstanding his (Felgar's) argument, but what is the different between what he said and what Gerry said. They both said that Te'o would drop in the draft. I did not hear what Callahan said and am trying to reconstruct Callahan's argument based on the thread. Sorry for any misconceptions and please fill me in on the differences
nope specifically saying it would be a distraction, and anyone that tries to argue that his sexuality wouldn't be a potential distraction to an NFL team is full of shit. It shouldn't be but most of this country can't agree on gay marriage, an NFL locker room won't be any different.Red(s)HawksFan said:
Was Felger specifically addressing Te'o's sexuality as a "distraction"? Callahan clearly was. Felger could have been arguing the distraction of the actual scandal (the fake girlfriend thing) without going into discussions or innuendos about Te'o's sexual orientation. Between the story of Te'o being "catfished" and his poor performance at the combine, there's plenty of wiggle room for teams to back away from the guy and cause his draft stock to drop without touching the question of whether or not he is gay.
Red(s)HawksFan said:Was Felger specifically addressing Te'o's sexuality as a "distraction"? Callahan clearly was. Felger could have been arguing the distraction of the actual scandal (the fake girlfriend thing) without going into discussions or innuendos about Te'o's sexual orientation. Between the story of Te'o being "catfished" and his poor performance at the combine, there's plenty of wiggle room for teams to back away from the guy and cause his draft stock to drop without touching the question of whether or not he is gay.
They brought up Buck's name at some point, as an example. Gerry said that you really couldn't use him as an example, because :"everybody loves Buck" He said that it would have to be somebody like CHB or Borges to make the analogy work.wutang112878 said:If Callahan really wants to have an intelligent discussion around how will that work, invite Buckley on the show. While he doesnt cover football I think he would have an interesting perspective on the issue. Callahan himself, with is abrasive style just is not the appropriate moderator for the topic
I wouldn't go as far as you that Felger was criticizing the NFL, more acknowledging the issue that it is going to be tough for Te'o to both get drafted and the crap he is going to take in the locker room just becaue of rumors. Wiggy said the bigger issue is going to be the knucklehead jokers that were probably going to cause the biggest issue by taking a few jokes too far.Phenom said:Felger was talking about Te'o's sexuality as a distraction. The distinction is, he kept saying how wrong it is that Te'o's sexual orientation would be a potential issue, how he personally doesn't care, etc. Felger was criticizing the NFL culture.
If Callahan is doing the same thing, then he and Felger have the same argument. But if he's sympathetic to the fact that it would be a distraction, then it's different.
MyDaughterLovesTomGordon said:Callahan was not criticizing the NFL culture. He was demanding that it be acknowledged: NFL locker rooms will not allow an openly gay player, etc., etc. He was arguing draft rank dropping, yes, but also that GMs would just KNOW that being openly gay in the NFL is not tenable. Because "that's the way it is."
It's paranoia as prediction, though, and that's where Minihane did well to call him out. Callahan kept going with "they" arguments - they'll be all over him, they'll make it hard for him, blah, blah.
But the question is valid: How will that work? Will they beat him up? Will they hit him harder than they already hit people? Will they headhunt and risk penalties and fines because they really hate the gays? Will they call him epithets that are actually illegal with hate speech laws in place? Maybe, but mostly not, right?
Worst of all, though, is the speculation, and everyone is culpable there. That "is he or isn't he" is a legitimate topic of conversation is weak.
CantKeepmedown said:They brought up Buck's name at some point, as an example. Gerry said that you really couldn't use him as an example, because :"everybody loves Buck" He said that it would have to be somebody like CHB or Borges to make the analogy work.
HomeBrew1901 said:With regard to the bold, what thehell are you talking about?
MyDaughterLovesTomGordon said:
Sure, it would take brass balls to go to HR with a sexual harassment complaint, but that kind of speech is definitely illegal and I'm sure that drafting an openly gay player would set the HR wheels in motion and everyone would be on their guard for it. If a player got drummed out of the league because players in the locker room were riding him for being gay, he'd have a great case for pocketing millions of dollars in a lawsuit against whatever team drafted him.
HomeBrew1901 said:Yeah. Good luck with that.
Also, your last paragraph pretty much sums up why a lot of teams will probably pass on him.
MyDaughterLovesTomGordon said:Being on a football team is a job. In the workplace, workers are protected against sexually oriented speech that creates a "hostile or offensive working environment." So, while you can make fun of someone for a lot of things, you can't make fun of them for being gay. And you certainly can't mean spiritedly and constantly rag on someone for being gay in the workplace.
Even football teams have HR departments, and I'm sure they would be smart enough to instruct everyone in the organization on the law and the rights held by all of the organization's employees.
Sure, it would take brass balls to go to HR with a sexual harassment complaint, but that kind of speech is definitely illegal and I'm sure that drafting an openly gay player would set the HR wheels in motion and everyone would be on their guard for it. If a player got drummed out of the league because players in the locker room were riding him for being gay, he'd have a great case for pocketing millions of dollars in a lawsuit against whatever team drafted him.
MyDaughterLovesTomGordon said:To clarify, I don't necessarily think that Callahan is totally wrong that some teams will value Teo less if he's comes out.
My problems are:
1. There's a difference between saying, "teams are going to devalue him if he comes out as gay - that's sad and pathetic, but it's the neanderthal-like league we have until someone has the balls to change it" and saying, "teams are going to devalue him if he comes out as gay - that's just the way it is! Deal with it!" The latter is Callahan's position, which implicitly acknowledges that it's okay to see gays as less valuable because of their sexual orientation. As in, "football players just don't like gays! Get over it!" That's homophobic and overly cynical to boot.
2. I think this rampant speculation about whether Teo specifically is gay is really, really bad, and having whole hypothetical discussions about it really rubs me the wrong way. That's not just on Callahan but on everyone who's decided to make it a "story." He says he's not. Stop talking about whether he is or not until there's some evidence to say he's lying.